diff mbox series

tree-eh: Don't crash on GIMPLE_TRY_FINALLY with empty cleanup sequence [PR117845]

Message ID 01020193a2cf46a4-2383fe98-a968-46ae-aed3-6f407ddc8e29-000000@eu-west-1.amazonses.com
State New
Headers show
Series tree-eh: Don't crash on GIMPLE_TRY_FINALLY with empty cleanup sequence [PR117845] | expand

Commit Message

Simon Martin Dec. 7, 2024, 8:28 p.m. UTC 
The following valid code triggers an ICE with -fsanitize=address

=== cut here ===
void l() {
    auto const ints = {0,1,2,3,4,5};
    for (auto i : { 3 } ) {
        __builtin_printf("%d ", i);
    }
}
=== cut here ===

The problem is that honor_protect_cleanup_actions does not expect the
cleanup sequence of a GIMPLE_TRY_FINALLY to be empty. It is however the
case here since r14-8681-gceb242f5302027, because lower_stmt removes the
only statement in the sequence: a ASAN_MARK statement for the array that
backs the initializer_list).

This patch simply checks that the finally block is not 0 before
accessing it in honor_protect_cleanup_actions.

Successfully tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK for trunk and gcc-14?

	PR c++/117845

gcc/ChangeLog:

	* tree-eh.cc (honor_protect_cleanup_actions): Support empty
	finally sequences.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

	* g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C: New test.
	* g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C: New test.

---
 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C | 12 ++++++++++++
 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C   | 12 ++++++++++++
 gcc/tree-eh.cc                         |  3 ++-
 3 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C

Comments

Richard Biener Dec. 8, 2024, 9:27 a.m. UTC | #1 
On Sat, Dec 7, 2024 at 9:29 PM Simon Martin <simon@nasilyan.com> wrote:
>
> The following valid code triggers an ICE with -fsanitize=address
>
> === cut here ===
> void l() {
>     auto const ints = {0,1,2,3,4,5};
>     for (auto i : { 3 } ) {
>         __builtin_printf("%d ", i);
>     }
> }
> === cut here ===
>
> The problem is that honor_protect_cleanup_actions does not expect the
> cleanup sequence of a GIMPLE_TRY_FINALLY to be empty. It is however the
> case here since r14-8681-gceb242f5302027, because lower_stmt removes the
> only statement in the sequence: a ASAN_MARK statement for the array that
> backs the initializer_list).
>
> This patch simply checks that the finally block is not 0 before
> accessing it in honor_protect_cleanup_actions.
>
> Successfully tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK for trunk and gcc-14?
>
>         PR c++/117845
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
>         * tree-eh.cc (honor_protect_cleanup_actions): Support empty
>         finally sequences.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
>         * g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C: New test.
>         * g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C: New test.
>
> ---
>  gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C | 12 ++++++++++++
>  gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C   | 12 ++++++++++++
>  gcc/tree-eh.cc                         |  3 ++-
>  3 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
>  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C
>
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..c0556397009
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
> +// PR c++/117845 - Actually valid variant
> +// { dg-do "compile" }
> +// { dg-options "-fsanitize=address" }
> +
> +#include <initializer_list>
> +
> +void l() {
> +    auto const ints = {0,1,2,3,4,5};
> +    for (auto i : { 3 } ) {
> +        __builtin_printf("%d ", i);
> +    }
> +}
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..d90d351e270
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
> +// PR c++/117845 - Initially reported case.
> +// { dg-do "compile" }
> +// { dg-options "-fsanitize=address" }
> +
> +#include <initializer_list>
> +
> +void l() {
> +    auto const ints = {0,1,2,3,4,5};
> +    for (int i : ints | h) { // { dg-error "was not declared" }
> +        __builtin_printf("%d ", i);
> +    }
> +}
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-eh.cc b/gcc/tree-eh.cc
> index 769785fad2b..dc920de9b38 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree-eh.cc
> +++ b/gcc/tree-eh.cc
> @@ -1026,7 +1026,8 @@ honor_protect_cleanup_actions (struct leh_state *outer_state,
>          MUST_NOT_THROW filter.  */
>        gimple_stmt_iterator gsi = gsi_start (finally);
>        gimple *x = gsi_stmt (gsi);
> -      if (gimple_code (x) == GIMPLE_TRY
> +      if (x

style-wise you should check for gsi_end_p (gsi) before
calling gsi_stmt on the iterator.  Implementation-wise
your patch has the same effect, of course.

Can you still refactor it this way?

Thanks,
Richard.

> +         && gimple_code (x) == GIMPLE_TRY
>           && gimple_try_kind (x) == GIMPLE_TRY_CATCH
>           && gimple_try_catch_is_cleanup (x))
>         {
> --
> 2.44.0
>
Simon Martin Dec. 8, 2024, 10:10 a.m. UTC | #2 
Hi Richard,

On 8 Dec 2024, at 10:27, Richard Biener wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 7, 2024 at 9:29 PM Simon Martin <simon@nasilyan.com> 
> wrote:
>>
>> The following valid code triggers an ICE with -fsanitize=address
>>
>> === cut here ===
>> void l() {
>>     auto const ints = {0,1,2,3,4,5};
>>     for (auto i : { 3 } ) {
>>         __builtin_printf("%d ", i);
>>     }
>> }
>> === cut here ===
>>
>> The problem is that honor_protect_cleanup_actions does not expect the

>> cleanup sequence of a GIMPLE_TRY_FINALLY to be empty. It is however 
>> the
>> case here since r14-8681-gceb242f5302027, because lower_stmt removes 
>> the
>> only statement in the sequence: a ASAN_MARK statement for the array 
>> that
>> backs the initializer_list).
>>
>> This patch simply checks that the finally block is not 0 before
>> accessing it in honor_protect_cleanup_actions.
>>
>> Successfully tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK for trunk and gcc-14?
>>
>>         PR c++/117845
>>
>> gcc/ChangeLog:
>>
>>         * tree-eh.cc (honor_protect_cleanup_actions): Support empty
>>         finally sequences.
>>
>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>>
>>         * g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C: New test.
>>         * g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C: New test.
>>
>> ---
>>  gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C | 12 ++++++++++++
>>  gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C   | 12 ++++++++++++
>>  gcc/tree-eh.cc                         |  3 ++-
>>  3 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
>>  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C
>>
>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C 
>> b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 00000000000..c0556397009
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
>> @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
>> +// PR c++/117845 - Actually valid variant
>> +// { dg-do "compile" }
>> +// { dg-options "-fsanitize=address" }
>> +
>> +#include <initializer_list>
>> +
>> +void l() {
>> +    auto const ints = {0,1,2,3,4,5};
>> +    for (auto i : { 3 } ) {
>> +        __builtin_printf("%d ", i);
>> +    }
>> +}
>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C 
>> b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 00000000000..d90d351e270
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C
>> @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
>> +// PR c++/117845 - Initially reported case.
>> +// { dg-do "compile" }
>> +// { dg-options "-fsanitize=address" }
>> +
>> +#include <initializer_list>
>> +
>> +void l() {
>> +    auto const ints = {0,1,2,3,4,5};
>> +    for (int i : ints | h) { // { dg-error "was not declared" }
>> +        __builtin_printf("%d ", i);
>> +    }
>> +}
>> diff --git a/gcc/tree-eh.cc b/gcc/tree-eh.cc
>> index 769785fad2b..dc920de9b38 100644
>> --- a/gcc/tree-eh.cc
>> +++ b/gcc/tree-eh.cc
>> @@ -1026,7 +1026,8 @@ honor_protect_cleanup_actions (struct leh_state 
>> *outer_state,
>>          MUST_NOT_THROW filter.  */
>>        gimple_stmt_iterator gsi = gsi_start (finally);
>>        gimple *x = gsi_stmt (gsi);
>> -      if (gimple_code (x) == GIMPLE_TRY
>> +      if (x
>
> style-wise you should check for gsi_end_p (gsi) before
> calling gsi_stmt on the iterator.  Implementation-wise
> your patch has the same effect, of course.
>
> Can you still refactor it this way?
Sure, here’s the updated version that I’m currently testing. Ok for 
trunk and gcc-14 assuming the testing comes back all green?

Thanks!
   Simon
From b7d2918b249b57e2ca236acac66cc3503f5bddeb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Simon Martin <simon@nasilyan.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2024 11:04:24 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] tree-eh: Don't crash on GIMPLE_TRY_FINALLY with empty cleanup
 sequence [PR117845]

The following valid code triggers an ICE with -fsanitize=address

=== cut here ===
void l() {
    auto const ints = {0,1,2,3,4,5};
    for (auto i : { 3 } ) {
        __builtin_printf("%d ", i);
    }
}
=== cut here ===

The problem is that honor_protect_cleanup_actions does not expect the
cleanup sequence of a GIMPLE_TRY_FINALLY to be empty. It is however the
case here since r14-8681-gceb242f5302027, because lower_stmt removes the
only statement in the sequence: a ASAN_MARK statement for the array that
backs the initializer_list).

This patch simply checks that the finally block is not 0 before
accessing it in honor_protect_cleanup_actions.

Successfully tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK for trunk and gcc-14?

	PR c++/117845

gcc/ChangeLog:

	* tree-eh.cc (honor_protect_cleanup_actions): Support empty
	finally sequences.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

	* g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C: New test.
	* g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C: New test.

---
 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C | 12 ++++++++++++
 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C   | 12 ++++++++++++
 gcc/tree-eh.cc                         |  5 +++--
 3 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..c0556397009
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+// PR c++/117845 - Actually valid variant
+// { dg-do "compile" }
+// { dg-options "-fsanitize=address" }
+
+#include <initializer_list>
+
+void l() {
+    auto const ints = {0,1,2,3,4,5};
+    for (auto i : { 3 } ) {
+        __builtin_printf("%d ", i);
+    }
+}
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..d90d351e270
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+// PR c++/117845 - Initially reported case.
+// { dg-do "compile" }
+// { dg-options "-fsanitize=address" }
+
+#include <initializer_list>
+
+void l() {
+    auto const ints = {0,1,2,3,4,5};
+    for (int i : ints | h) { // { dg-error "was not declared" }
+        __builtin_printf("%d ", i);
+    }
+}
diff --git a/gcc/tree-eh.cc b/gcc/tree-eh.cc
index 769785fad2b..e8af5fb8989 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-eh.cc
+++ b/gcc/tree-eh.cc
@@ -1025,8 +1025,9 @@ honor_protect_cleanup_actions (struct leh_state *outer_state,
 	 terminate before we get to it, so strip it away before adding the
 	 MUST_NOT_THROW filter.  */
       gimple_stmt_iterator gsi = gsi_start (finally);
-      gimple *x = gsi_stmt (gsi);
-      if (gimple_code (x) == GIMPLE_TRY
+      gimple *x = !gsi_end_p (gsi) ? gsi_stmt (gsi) : NULL;
+      if (x
+	  && gimple_code (x) == GIMPLE_TRY
 	  && gimple_try_kind (x) == GIMPLE_TRY_CATCH
 	  && gimple_try_catch_is_cleanup (x))
 	{
Simon Martin Dec. 8, 2024, 5:11 p.m. UTC | #3 
On 8 Dec 2024, at 11:10, Simon Martin wrote:

> Hi Richard,
>
> On 8 Dec 2024, at 10:27, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Dec 7, 2024 at 9:29 PM Simon Martin <simon@nasilyan.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The following valid code triggers an ICE with -fsanitize=address
>>>
>>> === cut here ===
>>> void l() {
>>>     auto const ints = {0,1,2,3,4,5};
>>>     for (auto i : { 3 } ) {
>>>         __builtin_printf("%d ", i);
>>>     }
>>> }
>>> === cut here ===
>>>
>>> The problem is that honor_protect_cleanup_actions does not expect the
>
>>> cleanup sequence of a GIMPLE_TRY_FINALLY to be empty. It is however
>>> the
>>> case here since r14-8681-gceb242f5302027, because lower_stmt removes
>>> the
>>> only statement in the sequence: a ASAN_MARK statement for the array
>>> that
>>> backs the initializer_list).
>>>
>>> This patch simply checks that the finally block is not 0 before
>>> accessing it in honor_protect_cleanup_actions.
>>>
>>> Successfully tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK for trunk and gcc-14?
>>>
>>>         PR c++/117845
>>>
>>> gcc/ChangeLog:
>>>
>>>         * tree-eh.cc (honor_protect_cleanup_actions): Support empty
>>>         finally sequences.
>>>
>>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>>>
>>>         * g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C: New test.
>>>         * g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C: New test.
>>>
>>> ---
>>>  gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C | 12 ++++++++++++
>>>  gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C   | 12 ++++++++++++
>>>  gcc/tree-eh.cc                         |  3 ++-
>>>  3 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
>>>  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C
>>>
>>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
>>> b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 00000000000..c0556397009
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
>>> +// PR c++/117845 - Actually valid variant
>>> +// { dg-do "compile" }
>>> +// { dg-options "-fsanitize=address" }
>>> +
>>> +#include <initializer_list>
>>> +
>>> +void l() {
>>> +    auto const ints = {0,1,2,3,4,5};
>>> +    for (auto i : { 3 } ) {
>>> +        __builtin_printf("%d ", i);
>>> +    }
>>> +}
>>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C
>>> b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 00000000000..d90d351e270
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
>>> +// PR c++/117845 - Initially reported case.
>>> +// { dg-do "compile" }
>>> +// { dg-options "-fsanitize=address" }
>>> +
>>> +#include <initializer_list>
>>> +
>>> +void l() {
>>> +    auto const ints = {0,1,2,3,4,5};
>>> +    for (int i : ints | h) { // { dg-error "was not declared" }
>>> +        __builtin_printf("%d ", i);
>>> +    }
>>> +}
>>> diff --git a/gcc/tree-eh.cc b/gcc/tree-eh.cc
>>> index 769785fad2b..dc920de9b38 100644
>>> --- a/gcc/tree-eh.cc
>>> +++ b/gcc/tree-eh.cc
>>> @@ -1026,7 +1026,8 @@ honor_protect_cleanup_actions (struct leh_state
>>> *outer_state,
>>>          MUST_NOT_THROW filter.  */
>>>        gimple_stmt_iterator gsi = gsi_start (finally);
>>>        gimple *x = gsi_stmt (gsi);
>>> -      if (gimple_code (x) == GIMPLE_TRY
>>> +      if (x
>>
>> style-wise you should check for gsi_end_p (gsi) before
>> calling gsi_stmt on the iterator.  Implementation-wise
>> your patch has the same effect, of course.
>>
>> Can you still refactor it this way?
> Sure, here’s the updated version that I’m currently testing. Ok for
> trunk and gcc-14 assuming the testing comes back all green?
FYI the testing on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu of the updated patch was successful.

Simon
Richard Biener Dec. 8, 2024, 6 p.m. UTC | #4 
> Am 08.12.2024 um 18:11 schrieb Simon Martin <simon@nasilyan.com>:
> 
> On 8 Dec 2024, at 11:10, Simon Martin wrote:
> 
>> Hi Richard,
>> 
>>> On 8 Dec 2024, at 10:27, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Dec 7, 2024 at 9:29 PM Simon Martin <simon@nasilyan.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> The following valid code triggers an ICE with -fsanitize=address
>>>> 
>>>> === cut here ===
>>>> void l() {
>>>>    auto const ints = {0,1,2,3,4,5};
>>>>    for (auto i : { 3 } ) {
>>>>        __builtin_printf("%d ", i);
>>>>    }
>>>> }
>>>> === cut here ===
>>>> 
>>>> The problem is that honor_protect_cleanup_actions does not expect the
>> 
>>>> cleanup sequence of a GIMPLE_TRY_FINALLY to be empty. It is however
>>>> the
>>>> case here since r14-8681-gceb242f5302027, because lower_stmt removes
>>>> the
>>>> only statement in the sequence: a ASAN_MARK statement for the array
>>>> that
>>>> backs the initializer_list).
>>>> 
>>>> This patch simply checks that the finally block is not 0 before
>>>> accessing it in honor_protect_cleanup_actions.
>>>> 
>>>> Successfully tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK for trunk and gcc-14?
>>>> 
>>>>        PR c++/117845
>>>> 
>>>> gcc/ChangeLog:
>>>> 
>>>>        * tree-eh.cc (honor_protect_cleanup_actions): Support empty
>>>>        finally sequences.
>>>> 
>>>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>>>> 
>>>>        * g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C: New test.
>>>>        * g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C: New test.
>>>> 
>>>> ---
>>>> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C | 12 ++++++++++++
>>>> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C   | 12 ++++++++++++
>>>> gcc/tree-eh.cc                         |  3 ++-
>>>> 3 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
>>>> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C
>>>> 
>>>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
>>>> b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> index 00000000000..c0556397009
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
>>>> +// PR c++/117845 - Actually valid variant
>>>> +// { dg-do "compile" }
>>>> +// { dg-options "-fsanitize=address" }
>>>> +
>>>> +#include <initializer_list>
>>>> +
>>>> +void l() {
>>>> +    auto const ints = {0,1,2,3,4,5};
>>>> +    for (auto i : { 3 } ) {
>>>> +        __builtin_printf("%d ", i);
>>>> +    }
>>>> +}
>>>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C
>>>> b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> index 00000000000..d90d351e270
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
>>>> +// PR c++/117845 - Initially reported case.
>>>> +// { dg-do "compile" }
>>>> +// { dg-options "-fsanitize=address" }
>>>> +
>>>> +#include <initializer_list>
>>>> +
>>>> +void l() {
>>>> +    auto const ints = {0,1,2,3,4,5};
>>>> +    for (int i : ints | h) { // { dg-error "was not declared" }
>>>> +        __builtin_printf("%d ", i);
>>>> +    }
>>>> +}
>>>> diff --git a/gcc/tree-eh.cc b/gcc/tree-eh.cc
>>>> index 769785fad2b..dc920de9b38 100644
>>>> --- a/gcc/tree-eh.cc
>>>> +++ b/gcc/tree-eh.cc
>>>> @@ -1026,7 +1026,8 @@ honor_protect_cleanup_actions (struct leh_state
>>>> *outer_state,
>>>>         MUST_NOT_THROW filter.  */
>>>>       gimple_stmt_iterator gsi = gsi_start (finally);
>>>>       gimple *x = gsi_stmt (gsi);
>>>> -      if (gimple_code (x) == GIMPLE_TRY
>>>> +      if (x
>>> 
>>> style-wise you should check for gsi_end_p (gsi) before
>>> calling gsi_stmt on the iterator.  Implementation-wise
>>> your patch has the same effect, of course.
>>> 
>>> Can you still refactor it this way?
>> Sure, here’s the updated version that I’m currently testing. Ok for
>> trunk and gcc-14 assuming the testing comes back all green?
> FYI the testing on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu of the updated patch was successful.

Ok

Richard 

> Simon
>
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..c0556397009
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845-2.C
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@ 
+// PR c++/117845 - Actually valid variant
+// { dg-do "compile" }
+// { dg-options "-fsanitize=address" }
+
+#include <initializer_list>
+
+void l() {
+    auto const ints = {0,1,2,3,4,5};
+    for (auto i : { 3 } ) {
+        __builtin_printf("%d ", i);
+    }
+}
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..d90d351e270
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/pr117845.C
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@ 
+// PR c++/117845 - Initially reported case.
+// { dg-do "compile" }
+// { dg-options "-fsanitize=address" }
+
+#include <initializer_list>
+
+void l() {
+    auto const ints = {0,1,2,3,4,5};
+    for (int i : ints | h) { // { dg-error "was not declared" }
+        __builtin_printf("%d ", i);
+    }
+}
diff --git a/gcc/tree-eh.cc b/gcc/tree-eh.cc
index 769785fad2b..dc920de9b38 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-eh.cc
+++ b/gcc/tree-eh.cc
@@ -1026,7 +1026,8 @@  honor_protect_cleanup_actions (struct leh_state *outer_state,
 	 MUST_NOT_THROW filter.  */
       gimple_stmt_iterator gsi = gsi_start (finally);
       gimple *x = gsi_stmt (gsi);
-      if (gimple_code (x) == GIMPLE_TRY
+      if (x
+	  && gimple_code (x) == GIMPLE_TRY
 	  && gimple_try_kind (x) == GIMPLE_TRY_CATCH
 	  && gimple_try_catch_is_cleanup (x))
 	{